Pressure Cooker Control

It is outrageous that just anyone – even kids! – can buy a dangerous pressure cooker without a background check or even showing ID. There is no waiting period and people – potentially unbalanced and dangerous – can legally buy multiple pressure cookers. Just like that!

“We” need pressure cooker control!

If you’re laughing, don’t. Because the same imbecile arguments are commonly used – and accepted – when it comes to justifying the imposition of restrictions on firearms.

What’s interesting – the tragedy of our time – is how many people are unable to form the conceptual connection in their minds. That one thing implies another. If it’s justifiable to restrict access to X because it’s possible that someone might use X to hurt people, then it is also justifiable to restrict access to Y on the same basis. Pressure cookers need to be “controlled” for the same (imbecile) reason that guns must be “controlled.”

Same goes for anything else that could be used for evil purposes.

Right?

Is it the body count that counts? Up to now, the anti-gun fetishists have excoriated firearms on the basis of their greater lethality potential. That a “high capacity” magazine or “semi-automatic” design means a person can deal out more death. Well, Monday’s mayhem far eclipses Columbine and Newtown combined. Almost 200 people (at last count) injured and killed. And there is also the earlier example of the Bath Township School Massacre – where explosives were used to murder more than 30 people.

Well?

Is it “easy access”?

What could be easier than buying a pressure cooker? Or a box of roofing nails? Or how about a few gallons of gasoline? There’s no limit on the amount of gas you can buy – and it would be no trouble at all for some sick SOB to pour a gallon into a bucket, throw the contents on someone else – followed by a match. Death will come as surely as it would from a nine millimeter slug. A sick-minded person could kill very effectively with a large SUV, too.

But of course, most people don’t throw gas on other people and set them on fire. Most people would never use a pressure cooker for anything more lethal than a gut-bomb fried chicken dinner. Roofing nails are usually used… on roofs. SUVs are not commonly driven onto playgrounds with the object of running over as many little kids as possible.

Because most people are not sick in the head.

And that goes for most gun owners, too.

But here’s the difference: Most people do not own guns. Especially “city” people. And so, out of ignorance, out of fear – and because it does not affect them – they support “controlling” guns. If they owned guns – if they were a part of their everyday lives – like gas or roofing nails and yes, pressure cookers, too – then calls to restrict, deny and punish people for possessing (and responsibly using) these harmless-in-themselves objects would be met with howls of derision.

Instead, we have the conceptual short circuit – the end product of the intellectual crippling of the average American.

Thus, guns (and only guns) are inherently and universally malignant. Because only they are sometimes used for evil purposes. But never pressure cookers, gasoline, roofing nails or any other item – even though those items can be (and have been) used as or even more effectively to kill innocent people.

A reasonably bright middle schooler ought to be able to discern the fallacy. Unfortunately, the average American adult – with a college degree – cannot. This is absolutely deliberate – the result of carefully planned policy. The entire object of government schools is to snuff the conceptual capacity. To render the patient unable to ever think beyond particulars. Such a person is then easily manipulated by the most infantile arguments – emotional pleadings, really.

All of this is obvious to those who have escaped the conceptual crippling that has been done to the American volk. The horror of it, though, is that most people have not escaped it – leaving the few who have in the position of an innocent man thrown in prison. It’s all wrong – and he knows it’s wrong.

But the rest of them not only don’t know it – they don’t want to know it.

A company actually pulled pressure cookers from store shelves. Amazing. Attempted tool control in action. I’m surprised they reversed that decision and allowed pressure cookers back onto their shelves:

Descartes Epistemology:
Each problem that I solve becomes a rule which serves me afterwards in the solution of other problems. Except my own thoughts, there is nothing absolutely in my power. Cogito ergo sum. I think: therefore I am.

Ah…because opening those doors of perception wouldn’t serve them at all. No, not at all; can’t have the serfs come back from an altered reality saying dangerous things like “Ya’know, things aren’t always what they seem…”

No, better to bring in drugs known to addict, ravage, and kill; profitable AND keeps the serfs in line.

That is precisely what Clover cannot comprehend. Even if by some miracle, the microscopic mind of Clover should somehow start winning arguments against us, it won’t mean what Clover thinks it would mean.

This is not a cult of personality. There is no official sanction or designation of deity-for-a-day. The value exchanged is the facts and ideas themselves, not the individual nor their reputation. We don’t need no steenking badges.

Its only the parasitical-minded statist who exists by finding the right host to attach themselves to and suckle from like some sort of primitive amoebic baboon.

It seems you’re living two lives. One life as Thomas Anderson a programmer who pays his taxes, and carries his landlady’s garbage. The other life as a hacker known as Neo who commits every computer crime we have a law for. We’re willing to wipe the slate clean, and let you have a future, all we’re asking for is your help in bringing Morpheus, a known terrorist, to justice.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fosG7tmWTZ8

“… video footage of the first bomb in Boston doesn’t appear to show any shrapnel damage to the fencing near the explosion, or to the blue canopy just above the street. …

Security personnel wearing yellow jackets were standing closer to the bomb, but they didn’t wobble or duck or waver. …

a storefront which was presumably right next to the first bomb. The windows are blown out. But all the glass is lying in the street, which would indicate the force of the explosion was coming from inside the store. How is that possible…

look at a photo of the younger Tsarnaev brother leaving the scene after the bombs went off. He’s still…wearing his backpack? And another photo, the one of the ripped-apart backpack on the ground. Is that a white square on it? Because one of the Seal-Craft-Coast Guard guys had a white square on his intact backpack…and is that him, leaving the scene of the bombing without that backpack? Hmmm…” …

What’s next?
The rest of the article was kind of, as they say, ‘chilling’ and covers everybody here.

I knew a guy once who had dog which was trained to remain completely still as a piece of cheese was balanced on its snout, and as the owner backed away. The owner would laugh and then snap his fingers and the dog would flip the cheese off its snout and devour it.

Much of the American public is like that dog, conditioned and unwilling to see what’s right under their noses. ?

See, the anti-self-defense push is about outlawing all tools eventually, I think it’s a union job security thing too:

“… a second-grade teacher who was suspended after he displayed garden-variety tools such as wrenches, pliers and screwdrivers in his classroom as part of a “tool discussion” in his class…. Bartlett was subsequently penalized with a four-day suspension without pay – charged with possessing, carrying, storing or using a weapon.” …

More tool control: Is this saying they arrested the kid for – in essence – possessing a BB gun?
100-300 feet, it may be a high powered BB gun, but it’s still a BB gun. Hide your Red Rider and Run Ralphie!

“NYPD cops arrested Goal at 2:30 p.m. Monday and hit him with six misdemeanor violations of a local law that prohibits the possession or sale of air rifles and replica firearms,…”

Missouri Governor Lilburn W. Boggs’ Order of Extermination, Missouri Executive Order Number 44 – October 1838.

“General John B. Clark:

Your orders are, therefore, to hasten with all possible speed. The Mormons must be treated as enemies, and be exterminated or driven from the state for the public peace – their outrages are beyond all description.” (outrages include allowing multiple wives, the marrying of Native American women, and being strong anti-slavery advocates)

Pursuant to the Governors order, hundreds of Mormon civilians were, attacked, lynched, looted, tarred, raped, and murdered. The surviving Mormons fled to Nauvoo Illinois, where they experienced similar treatment, including the murder of their leader.

An apology for the treatment of Mormons was issued in 2004 by the Illinois House of Representatives. Excerpts of the apology:

“138 years ago Brigham Young and more than 20,000 members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints were expelled from the State of Illinois from Nauvoo, Illinois in 1844 in the largest forced migration in U.S. history.

The Mormons had drained the swamps and created fertile fields, and built and developed the city of Nauvoo into the tenth largest city in United States. They built their own court system, and had assembled the second largest army in the United States.

The fleeing Mormons founded Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, and several other western settlements. They assimilated many Native Americans into their church. In 1849, the Mormons raised the ire of the U.S. Federal Government by creating the State of Deseret out of newly acquired land from the Mexican Cession of 1848. The State of Deseret had its own constitution and encompassed the majority of the modern Southwestern United States, covering Southern California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico.

In 1857 President James Buchanan fulfilled his campaign promise to suppress Mormons and sent the United States military to occupy Utah and began the Utah War.

During decades of occupation by the United States military, Mormons were denied participation in local governance and juries, and most Mormon assets were seized. The Mormons were infiltrated and treated in a similar manner to the Native American tribes.

The Mormon lands were placed in federal trusts, and tax-funded government schools were created with the express purpose of culturally cleansing Mormons. This system of schools exists today, over 90% of Nevada and Las Vegas land is controlled by the federal government. In 1890, the Mormons capitulated and altered their religious institutions to be in compliance with all other United States Christian denominations.

Today Mormons and Utahns show more political support for private school vouchers and home education than any other states. The Mormons, like other American demographic minority groups such as Catholics, Jews, Native Americans, Mennonites, African-Americans, Japanese-Americans, are painfully aware that compulsory government education exists on the basis of long-standing ethnic, racial, religious, and political animosities and a majoritarian desire to control minority groups through the deception and fraud of “helping” and “civilizing” them.

I’ve got it figured out….that is, WHY, in the face of so much public, admitted, frank, open, easy-to-access, incontrovertible evidence Amoricons insist on believing known liars of the gunvernment.

Because everyone likes a good story.

And they’ve been trained to like good stories. Every movie, every TV show–neatly lined up in the allotted 30, 60, 90, or 120 minutes to end with a satisfying narrative denouement.

The Good Guys Win; preferably with a clear-cut delineation between Good and Bad. Most literally portrayed in westerns like Gun Smoke, with the Bad Guy wearing a Black Hat and the Good Guy wearing a White Hat…in case you nodded off in a Schlitz drunk and woke up toward the end.

It’s so obvious that the doyen of the neocons, evil old Leo Strauss, propagated the idea of the Noble Lie to his protege’s…among them, Willy Clinton. Leo’s favorite show was Gun Smoke.

So here’s my epiphany:

Amoricons will continue to reject the truth in favor of good narratives. He’ll take the good story every time, over messy (and difficult to digest) truths.

My neighbor. CEO of a several hundred million dollar company. Late 40’s, early 50’s. Fairly smart guy, Jewish; not a pushover. Walked over to his house yesterday to let my kids play with his German Shepherd; first thing out of his mouth, “Hey didja hear? 9,000 of our guys and we got’em!”

“Got whom Mark?”

“Ya know, those terrorists in Boston!”

“Mark you believe that?”

His face fell. Clouds over his expression, from sunny child-like satisfaction to a dour expression. Because deep inside, he KNOWS he’s being had–but he WANTS to be had!

So I gave him a quick introduction; Mark, explain how 400 troops and 2000 cops missed the bomb sitting on the fucking curb by the finish line. Explain why at least a dozen obvious operatives (Craft, Seals 3 & 5) were walking around in civvy uniforms carrying the identical backpack.

“C’mon, where have you been reading all that crap?”

“Mark, have you done any reading of your own? How can you call it crap when you’ve read nothing?”

Gave him a brief intro to false flags–Gulf of Tonkin, Gladio, Ajax, Northwoods.

“Yeah, that stuff might happen there but HERE, in AMERICA?”

“It can and does, Mark. We’re not so special; Germans thought they were pretty special too until 1945”

I don’t count on Mark inviting me over for dinner again any time soon.

Because I ruined the story.

It’s addictive, you see. The good story; the Good Guys, Our Team, how wonderful they are and by extension how wonderful We Are. So wonderful, in fact, they’ll purposely, diligently, carefully lie to themselves to maintain the illusion.

Your neighbor seems like a normal Pod Person. Reading this thread, seeing what’s happening around the country and how people are reacting,… I’m at a loss for words to describe it all accurately. Simply bizarre.

I emailed Scott Lazarowitz in response to his excellent Reason and Jest Blog article on martial law in Boston:

“Scott, thanks for your column which was posted on LRC today. Reading about the martial law imposed on Boston by the feds and MSP, I wondered just how accurately the media reported the compliance of the citizenry there. To me, the phrase that pops into mind when I think of the common people of Boston is their standard jibe, “FAAAAACK YEEEOU!”, spoken in an almost weary, exasperated tone.

Townies, and Southies, and the other Boston Irish commoners utter this jibe automatically in response to orders presumptively given by anyone, whether a cop, a bureaucrat, or any other outsider intruding on their neighborhoods or their personal space.

I can picture a crowd of street savvy, celtic cross & Irish tri-color tattooed “serious white people” (as they style themselves) yelling this at SWAT BDU clad skinheads who descend upon their street corner, ordering them to stay in their houses.

Storm Trooper: “Everybody, get inside your homes and stay there until this is over!”

Townies, in unison: “FAAAACK YEEEEOUUUU!”.

I picture that scene as opposed to the one shown on network TV of a bunch of sheep chanting “USA USA USA”, and it gives me some comfort, even if it may just be a fantasy of my own creation. Hell, maybe it even happened, what do I know?”

What do y’all think? Did all of “Baaaahsten” roll over and stay indoors? Obviously, one guy didn’t. He was the one who saw the fugitive patsy hiding in his boat and called the skinheads.

I can even imagine his 911 call:

“Yeah, the retahd youse ah looking fah? Well I just sar’im lyin’ in my boat”.

911 dispatcher: “All right, sir. Now stay in your house until officers respond.”

It’d be interesting – instructive – to know what “the law” is with respect to all of this.

As in:

Cops pound on homeowner’s door. Homeowner does not open, tells them he is fine, that they are not wanted here – and if they do not have a warrant, to leave now, please.

What happens?

Are the thugs legally obliged to respect the homeowner’s rights – and property? Or can the thugs legally just kick in the door and jam a gun under a peaceful citizen’s chin – in his own home – and absent even the shabbiest pretext that some “crime” has been committed by him or anyone else within the home?

What if the homeowner “resists” – i.e., attempts to bar the door or (heaven forbid) defends his home and himself against an invasion of armed goons? Is that now a “crime”?

Probably.

If so, the rule of law is officially null and none of us have any rights that may not be violated at any time – even in our own homes. If so, they can do anything to us, at their pleasure. And the slightest objection or recalcitrance from us to their order-barking will mean summary treatment by them that’s no different than the treatment we might expect to receive from common street thugs.

Only it’s worse, because when it comes to government thugs, we’re told that we have a legal obligation to let them do as they please with us.

The sad reality is that a lone nut (or small group thereof) can wreak considerable mayhem. Trying to determine motive(s) is all well and good, but who can truly psychoanalyze the insane? The only “way” to even attempt to prevent re-occurrences of the Boston Marathon tragedy is to put the the country on “lock-down”, and that would of itself impose a far worse tragedy. But maybe that’s what the PTB want, to scare the sheeple shitless so they’ll accept further compromise of their freedoms.
As for the 9/11 thing, going on twelve years, the very actions of how the evidence (the WTC debris, especially the structural steel) was hastily disposed of, let alone the resemblance of the collapse of WTCs 1,2, and 7 to a controlled demolition (I could see that as WTC 1 went down, and somehow felt then there was some serious bullshit going on). That the official story is full of holes is obvious. The harder part, if indeed the whole mess was a conspiracy, like the JFK assassination, is WHO are the conspirators? Mine own pet theory is the thing was a false flag operation, orchestrated by the Mossad with the connivance of key members of the Bush Administration (“Shrub” himself was likely kept out of the loop as it seems plausible that he could be fooled and to maintain an aura of plausible deniability) , the motivation to get the resources of the US military to do Israel’s dirty work. But of course, I don’t have conclusive evidence, and by the nature of the beast, if I did, I doubt that I’d be in any condition to render this posting.

Gee were the gubmint agents supposed to leave the rubble there for all troothers to sift through and gather evidence? Controlled demolition? Any demolition company that dropped buildings like that would be sued and jailed into oblivion.

When a crime like murder is committed, Clover, evidence is kept. Not “piles of rubble” – your pathetic straw man – but certainly samples of the materials, so they are available for analysis. It does not strike you as odd that all of the structural steel was taken away – and melted down?

And who said anything about a company (i.e., a business)? That’s also your straw man, Clover.

Try again.

PS: “Gee” is a form of address frequently used by churnalists and spammers – especially those in government employ. We know who you are.

But it was sent to the “official” investigators, right? Troothers weren’t allowed to take any samples for themselves and start independent investigations? Troothers also have a right to have arrived at the scene and collected their own evidence?

“Troothers also have a right to have arrived at the scene and collected their own evidence?”

Gill the Shill, I know you can’t help being stupid but you could STFU. I’m glad I have never had a dog as dumb as you are. It would be a real chore keeping him from sitting in the road, licking his asshole while a car ran over him.

Does you supervisor have to make you stay at work until the traffic thins out? Don’t be mad at him, he’s just protecting you, the way I’d try to protect a dog as dumb as you, if I had the misfortune of owning such a dog.

Did your classmates in school trick you into repeating, one word at a time:
I…
am…
sofa…
king…
reet…
todd…
it………..?

Bet you’re still pissed off at them about their trick, ain’tcha?

Take a major pill, Gil the Shill. Be nice to yo’mama, ’cause she’s yo’ onliest friend. Stay out of the road unless someone is there to keep you from sitting down, or there’s no telling what you might do.

Aw what? You complain “they were quick to take away the evidence” then complain “yeah right, as if I actually wanted a chance to survey the wreckage”? After all, if it were a false flag bombing then the evidence would all contained in the rubble: thermite residue, explosives residue, the structure showing signs of being cut back at critical points, even some charges that failed to detonate properly, etc.

I get the impression Clover is a middle-aged (or older) person. I see a flabby Baby Boomer, either a “good Republican” or a “good Democrat.” Probably a low-level government “worker,” such as a postal driver. Living now off his pension – that is, off of us.

Oh and I suppose Libertarians wouldn’t mind if their neighbor was stockpiling fertilizer with reckless abandon (and maybe some diesel)? It’s his property and he hasn’t hurt anyone yet hence we can’t regulate it. It’s not like fertilizers can cause massive explosions or anything.

This Gil character has to be a government nogoodnik of some sort. He seems to constantly monitor this site – posting deliberately provocative missives – incitements to take action. Luckily, the regulars here have probably 40 IQ points (average) on him – so it’s more annoying than dangerous.

I am not so sure.
There are lots of people like that who aren’t government. Plus government types seem to single out the least intelligent and most gullible people they can find to work their manipulations of the masses. It’s really a waste of time for them to come here and try to provoke people. We are all too aware of how government operates.

“There are lots of people like that who aren’t government. Plus government types seem to single out the least intelligent and most gullible people they can find to work their manipulations of the masses. ”

BrentP, they aren’t trying to convince anyone, they’re here to reinforce the media line that anyone who questions an “official version” presented in the mainstream news media is a nutjob who thinks that black helicopters follow them around, and/or sees a government conspiracy behind everything.

There are, indeed, paid internet trolls. On several political discussion sites I frequented from ’95 to about ’02, there were certain IDs who started posting their “debunking” comments promptly at 9 am and were off the boards at 5 pm, every weekday. They didn’t post at night or on weekends. Their posting habits became the subject of jokes, because they were so obvious, like a signature.

This “trolling” still goes on and it’s fairly easy to spot, though some patterns have been changed up. There was an article a few years ago written by someone who told of being hired as a forum troll.

Sure, there are amateur trolls as well as paid professionals, and they have various styles. The amateurs probably do it to entertain themselves.

One common identifier is that they all post as though they assume that everyone is as dumb as they are. “Gil” is probably being paid. “Clover” appears to be an amateur.

The ones who hit and run under names like “WAKE UP AMERICA”, or “SAVE OUR COUNTRY”, and post little screeds suggesting that it’s time to “start shooting the oppressors” are most likely paid trolls.

I know there are paid trolls. But there are also real people who act like this. I know this for a fact. Their reality is the reality government shapes for them. To question it really bothers them. However most of them do tend to stay in places where their bubble isn’t threatened, where standard left-right rules the day.

“I know there are paid trolls. But there are also real people who act like this. I know this for a fact.”

Yes, I agree. In fact, the ones who do it on their own even seem to be a little more intelligent than their paid troll colleagues. ‘Course it doesn’t take much to be a little more intelligent than someone like ol’ Gil the Shill. ahaha

You, Ed (& co.), believe people who don’t agree with you are not only “trolls” but “government-sponsored”? Why? Because it would mean you’re so important the gubmint must silence you? I s’pose if you ever had a girlfriend and you had you’re first argument you’d assume she was a government-paid troll because you’re super-correct on everything and dissent cannot be tolerated.

“You, Ed (& co.), believe people who don’t agree with you are not only “trolls” but “government-sponsored””

No, Gil the Shill, I don’t believe any such thing. I can spot a troll, though. You’re a troll. You’re dimwitted, full of shit, and you keep jumping into discussions where you clearly have nothing intelligent to add.

It isn’t that you “disagree”. It’s that you are so determined to disrupt the discussion of ideas that your betters tell you are dangerous.

Anything you have to say here has already been said on a TV news show. Nobody is interested in hearing it again.

Ha! …And garden-houses! Those are Very popular with the well-to-do War-Party-Progressives and well-to-do War-Party-Neoconservatives.
… If they only knew.

We won’t even include the mills and distillers and rail-cars just about everywhere. …Or the septic tank trucks running around all over the place. Hey, I know, let’s ban those too? Life would be so much better without them.

What will happen is: more regulations will be put in place that will do nothing, just like what New Jersey’s idiot Governor admitted:

Judas Christie Makes It More Difficult for Honest Citizens to Buy Guns

“… “It’s hard for me to sit here today and say, ‘If all these things got imposed we’d see an ‘X’ percentage drop in gun violence in this state.’ I don’t know,” said Christie.” …

Rich, I’m definitely with Eric on Gil being on the dole, as in tax-feeding troll. Even after extended periods of having his/her/its posts blocked or deleted, the ongoing berating and derision by the regulars and when confronted with clear and concise irrefutable arguments, he/she/it vainly attempts to refute, Gil keeps lurking and coming back for more. No one but a paid shill would be that persistent. I’ve read that most psychopaths are slightly below average intelligence. Hence a government employee posting drivel seems to fit the Gil model quite well. He/she/it is (at times) entertaining though.

The immaculate imam Hussein the dear leader Messiah will keep us safe and equal in a precious equalocracy. His solid gold touch will be over everything and the light worker will prevail over evil doers. These scums from Derka Derkastan should love dear leader Messiah as he goes about saving the world. All the world except the evil whitey cracka racists love imam Hussein the immaculate! Hail Hail the ONe!

Do I think the president is capable of ordering a terrorist attack on his own country in a liberal section of the country just to further restrict the rights of citizens?

Yep. I believe it. In fact, I fully believe it.

Do I believe that members of the elite special forces would execute such a plan? Not entirely, but it is damn possible.

Do I believe that Chris Kyle was an above-board kind of guy? Yep. Do I believe that he was murdered for what he knew? Damn possible.

On my gut, this is all PROBABLY true. And I can convince myself that it is absolutely true if nobody can offer me an alternate theory that is even remotely possible.

Here’s one. The media is completely incompetent. Everyone of them should be fired for complete incompetence. But they never get fired for complete incompetence. That SUPPORTS the theory that the media is conspiring with TPTB and I can convince myself that it is entirely true without proof.

But before I let YOU tell me that it is undeniably true, I want proof.

But it is not PROVABLE.

Before I lock and load, for those of you who believe it to be absolutely true without proof, you need to prove it to me.

And still, with all of those independent, libertarian minds, if I do not follow in lock-step I am just another koolaid drinker.

“But before I let YOU tell me that it is undeniably true, I want proof.

But it is not PROVABLE.

Before I lock and load, for those of you who believe it to be absolutely true without proof, you need to prove it to me.

And still, with all of those independent, libertarian minds, if I do not follow in lock-step I am just another koolaid drinker.

You smell like a summer’s eve.”

Goddam, bum. I read all the same posts you read, and I missed the parts where all these nosepickers tried to force you to believe in some unified theory. You didn’t miss them, though. There can’t nobody slide nothing past you, no sir. You even wedged in that sly joke about the nosepickers smelling like a douche. Dayum!

The pressure cooker tale was one I immediately wanted to put in the same folder as the box cutter tale of 9/11. You know the folder I mean, the big, expanding one labeled BULLSHIT.

One of the mainstream reports I read described the pressure cooker bomb as an improvised claymore mine, made of a sealed cooker, charged with black powder and a shrapnel mixture of nails and ball bearings.

I can’t see how it would work the way it did if it were made that way. A claymore mine consists of a shaped charge of a very high speed explosive such as c-4. The shrapnel load is arranged in a face plate housing at the end of the shaped charge, not dumped into a pressure chamber along with loose explosive powder.

The pressure cooker bomb described by the dimbulb who wrote the article I read would have been more accurately described as a shrapnel bomb, which by the nature of the construction that the article vaguely described, would have had a 360 degree blast radius, rather than the fan-shaped explosive path of a claymore mine.

It’s a challenge for me to suspend disbelief long enough to read a mainstream news article, let alone to try to swallow whatever unrealistic idea the article presents.

I know it, liberranter. They have always done this kind of thing, though. In the days when the newspapers were their main medium, they would simply make up some weak story and throw it out there, such as;

The South Carolina Militia shelled a federal fort with no provocation, or The USS Maine was destroyed by explosives placed by saboteurs…

And, later, once they had the medium of TV news:

The president was shot three times from the rear with a medium-powered, surplus rifle which made his head explode from front to rear and created 7 distinct wounds in three different people, or 4 airliners were hijacked by terrorists using box cutters, and those airliners then flew like cruise missiles to NYC, DC and a field in PA, where two of them vaporized on impact, leaving no trace of plane wreckage….

They’re used to being able to toss out any kind of story they care to, and have it trumpeted over and over through their media megaphones, while they ignore any impertinent back chat from those they presume to propagandize.

‘Twas ever thus in this great country. It’s what makes us unique among nations, don’tchaknow.

Restricting the item instead of the person is -on paper- easier. Objects do not have rights, people do. But objects do not do harm without first being impelled by a person.

Thus:

Guns do not kill people, people kill people.
Baseballs do not bean batters, pitchers bean batters.
Hammers do not break fingers, people break fingers.

The list goes on ad infinitum.

But restricting a person -the insane person- who wishes to use an otherwise inanimate object to do bodily harm and/or homicide is -on paper- harder to control than an object.

Guns do not have rights, nor baseballs, nor hammers so restricting them does not violate the rights of the gun, baseball or hammer. Controling who is in possession of a gun, baseball or hammer is near impossible.

People -even insane people- have rights. They can sue in court to remain free (courtesy of the ACLU). They can refuse to take their meds that make them stable enough to remain free, and in so doing become so unstable that they are a danger to themselves and to others.

Placing the insane in some kind of custody would be the more effective choice. There are a lot less whack-jobs in the world than there are guns and/or gun owners.

Making a restriction on people -even looney-tunes people- goes against the instinct of libertarian thought. Making restrictions on objects -without thinking all the implications through- makes more sense. Thinking through all of the implications, there are many less people affected by insane-person control legislation than there are gun-control legislation.

Either choice looks and is Faustian in nature. Once I am confronted by such a Faustian choice, I choose the lesser of two evils. If someone or thing must be restricted, go for the least number of people affected.

Ponder this: libertarians want people punished for what they do. Kill a person with a gun, maim a person with a gun, rob a person with a gun, rape a person at the point of a gun: go to jail or the gallows.

Statists also want to punish people for actions. Buy a gun, own a gun, shoot your gun at a gun range, hunt a deer: go to jail or the gallows.

Both groups want to punish people for actions, but there is no way the actions that the different groups want to punish are morally equivalent.

Ed, this guy is indeed a got-damned genius. I wonder why there are issues in society when there are masses of super smart people like brevard bum out there in the world? 😉

My favorite part of this post (other than editing out all the insults I was going to say) is that it reminds me of most of the people I have attempted to wake up, but can’t. You lead the horse all the way to the water, and then the horse convinces itself that the mind control koolaid back at the other end of the path tastes really good so why drink the water here when there is perfectly good koolaid back there? The horse rambles off a few of its opinions on its way back to the koolaid, and here I am drinking the water banging my head against the wall because the opinions it rambled off make no fucking sense except to convince the horse that it is right. Good times.

“The horse rambles off a few of its opinions on its way back to the koolaid, and here I am drinking the water banging my head against the wall because the opinions it rambled off make no fucking sense except to convince the horse that it is right.”

Ahaha, that’s a great way of putting it, Jacob. We are surrounded by got-damn geniuses every time we leave our houses and go out among the great mass of TV addled humanity.

“… A photo of a mangled pressure cooker, posted by press outlets all over the world, shows the pressure-cooker plug and, near it, one small round hole, machined apparently by the manufacturer. But…no other small holes. I see discolorations but not dozens or hundreds of holes.

Yet we are told that the Marathon bombs were placed inside pressure cookers and packed with nails and ball bearings. If that were true, the explosions would have created many, many small holes as the inserted shrapnel flew through the cooker and out in every direction.

In the official press photo, there are no such holes.

How is that possible?

… Examine the press photo of the pressure cooker yourself. Does it show a whole cooker, with all parts intact, but bent and distorted, or does it show only part of a cooker, with a major section missing?

And second, if the bomber packed only one side of the bomb with nails and ball bearings and BBs, could the piece that is missing in the photo have contained all the holes caused by the shrapnel exiting the pressure cooker?

If we are really looking at the whole cooker, then we should we also see many holes. We don’t.

If we are looking at only part of the cooker, then regardless of whether the bomber packed all the shrapnel to exit through the missing piece, the fact that it’s missing suggests a shaped charge, the work of a pro.

Either way, somebody is deceiving us.”

I found those questions in a place ‘people-against-pressure-cookers’ would never look:

“… And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” – Karl Rove

If there is one large opening with little or no resistance (duct tape the cover over the explosives and nails) then the explosion (expansion of gases created by combusting a solid or liquid) will take the path of least resistance. Therefore the lid, followed by the nails and ball bearings will seem like an oversized shotgun. The pressure cooker acts as the breach and if it is even remotely braced, then all of the force of the explosion will exit the cooker via the lid, just as buckshot exits the barrel of a shotgun.

If this principle did not hold, then every semi-automatic pistol fired would result in the barrel, the breach and the slide disintegrating into schrapnel. At the very least, the slide would with equal force as the bullet leaving the barrel come off the back of the pistol frame and mangle the face of the shooter.

This is why conspiracy theorists have trouble with the truck bomb in Oklahoma City. How was the blast directed if the explosives were only in the truck? How did the blast go off so uniformly? The damage done to the Murrah building was extensive. Without a directed blast, there would have been a lot more damage to the surrounding area. Also, the amount of fertilizer and diesel in the truck to make that much damage would have had to go off in compartments of the truck. That much volume of explosive needs a lot of oxygen and a lot of pressure. Without reinforced walls of the truck and multiple triggers, the explosive would more likely flame out instead of explode. Think rocket fuel exhaust.

And now for the part that totally sucks. Pose a few logical arguments and immediately get lumped in with the 9-11 truthers.

So, now to debunk the 9-11 truthers. Grab a piece of rail road rail. Try to bend it. Thought so. Damn tough to do. Damn near impossible to do. Put the same rail over a campfire for about 20-30 minutes. Now try to bend it. Bends like a piece of conduit pipe.

So, when you see that the World trade center was burning for about 20-30 minutes, perhaps even longer, the I-beams melted enough to lose stability. Once the building started to collapse, the whole building just caved in vertically like a row of dominoes, each section hammering the lower sections with more momentum as it continued to fall on itself.

“the World trade center was burning for about 20-30 minutes, perhaps even longer, the I-beams melted enough to lose stability. Once the building started to collapse, the whole building just caved in vertically like a row of dominoes, each section hammering the lower sections with more momentum as it continued to fall on itself.”

Great debunking there, bum. That oughta shut them up for good. You’re a got-damn genius. 😉

“So, when you see that the World trade center was burning for about 20-30 minutes, perhaps even longer, the I-beams melted enough to lose stability. Once the building started to collapse, the whole building just caved in vertically like a row of dominoes, each section hammering the lower sections with more momentum as it continued to fall on itself.”

Except the WTC was “tube” construction, with an exterior sheathing (the facade). Perhaps some floor trusses might have failed. It doesn’t explain away the issue of the core and the improbability – the impossibility – of a symmetric collapse of the entire structure. And regardless, we have a critical problem: WTC 7. We were told the twin towers collapsed because the initial impact blew the protective coating off the trusses, then the high-temp fire from the jet fuel weakened the steel. For the sake of discussion, let’s accept that – setting aside the problems presented by the tube-structure of the buildings. Ok. But what about WTC 7? Not hit by airplanes – or subjected to jet fueled-fire. Yet it, too, collapsed into its own footprint at free-fall speeds?

How? There are numerous examples of tall buildings subjected to fire – including “totally involved.” None have ever collapsed.

This isn’t to say it’s not possible. It just seems very, very fishy.

Remember, also, that the Twin Towers were specifically designed to withstand the impact of a four-engined Boeing 707.

SOMEBODY, one of my professors I think, said that the Twin Towers were built to the same standard as the Empire State Building, to withstand planes from the 1930’s era.

I feel stupid just typing that.

And regarding the government schools comment, maybe it was just me, but my schools always encouraged outward thinking, and different opinions. It was my peers, however, that shut me up and taught me that its not okay to have an opinion, no matter what they tell you in your early years.

So the students help to accomplish what you say the government schools’ jobs are. And in my particular case, were the sole force.

There is outward thinking (I’m assuming you mean being broad-minded, taking other positions into account) and conceptual thinking – thinking in terms of principles and applying those principles to particular thing. Government schools – in my experience – never taught kids to think conceptually, at least not outside of mathematics.

I am speaking of ethical-philosophical issues. For example, the question: If something is impermissible (ethically) for an individual to do – such as stealing – can the same act become permissible (ethically) when a group (or its claimed representatives) does it? Etc.

One of the things that stands out from my own days as in inmate in government schools was the chaotic – deliberately chaotic, I think – way the day was structured. You’d start with 50 minutes of, say, history. Then the bell would ring – and off you’d go to chemistry or some other completely different thing. No real time spent on a given subject. This engendered lack of focus. Also, much of the instruction consisted of rote memorization rather than understanding something. One learned to regurgitate the expected information for the test – then promptly forgot it.

I had the interesting experience of experiencing both private school (first) and (later) government schools. It gave me some insight into the differing methods and purposes of both.

We touched on, “if someone steals food from a store out of starvation, is it still wrong?” not sure if that’s what you mean.

The other high school in town does four, 90-minutes classes, intended to reduce chaos and help with understanding. Not sure how it works.

Even teachers know that students don’t remember 90% of what they learn. I had a teacher tell us that we would just go over a few topics in the chapter, since she knew we’d forget everything after the tests.

I am not a forensic scientist. I do not claim to be an expert on stresses and materials. I only know what I have seen.

I have seen a car window withstand a baseball bat impact in direct center. I have seen others shatter with a .177 copperhead BB fired from a crossman 760 with as little as 5 pumps.

But in my analogy of the railroad ties, I have seen that happen. Railroad rail, set over a fire (granted the fire was burning for a while, so the core was pretty hot meaning that the fire was not freshly lit and then the beam put on immediately) 30 minutes later, with some exertion, the rail was hand bent.

Using logic does not debunk or otherwise disprove anything. It only suggests that something is possible.

It is entirely possible that the WTC fell because a small gang of lunatic arabs flew planes into a building, the fuel leaked, ignited, raised the temperature of the metal structure to the point of instability and the buildings caved in on themselves.

Proof? Not hardly. Just entirely within the realm of possibility.

The truthers dismiss “my” theory as totally impossible. There is just no talking to those people.

Pick any other disaster in US history that led to a crappy law or a war. I can discuss the possibilities of both sides of the argument.

I don’t have any proof either way in any case. But I can discuss the plausibility of theories. And I can state with confidence why I may or may not reject the plausibility of a theory without proof.

We did land on the moon because if we didn’t, somebody in on the big lie would have spilled by now.

Time travel is not possible because if it were somebody from the future would have visited by now.

My real problem is with what happened to WTC 7 vis-a-vis the Official Narrative.

The collapse looks exactly like a controlled demolition – which of course is not proof that it was a controlled demolition.

However, I’d like to know how/why this building failed the way it did. Not hit by an airplane; no jet-fuel fire – the reasons given for the collapse of the twin towers. Yet, like them, it fell at or near free-fall speed onto its own footprint. My understanding is that such a thing has never happened before – and there have been numerous instances of tall buildings subjected to multi-floor/extensive fires, etc.

Again, not proof of a controlled demolition – but it makes me question.

Ditto the way the WTC steel was just removed and disposed of. Why do this? It is evidence. At minimum, evidence in support of the government’s claims (if they are true).

Why the rush to dispose of it – all of it?

The Pentagon thing is really fishy.

I lived near DC; grew up there. On a warm fall day, there are thousands of tourists in that area – with cameras and video recorders. Why are there no video recordings of an airliner descending rapidly and flying at low altitude toward the Pentagon?

Why was there – initially – just a relatively small hole in the Pentagon facade? What happened to the wings and tail? To the enormous jet engines?

Then you get into the real nitty gritty stuff – pilot stuff. How does a barely qualified to fly a Cessna A-rab successfully execute high-performance maneuvers in a heavy jet? I know some pilots – including a retired fighter pilot – and none of them buy it.

“It is entirely possible that the WTC fell because a small gang of lunatic arabs flew planes into a building, the fuel leaked, ignited, raised the temperature of the metal structure to the point of instability and the buildings caved in on themselves.”

No, it isn’t even remotely possible. The reason we use the term, “Laws of Physics” is that there are observable, demonstrable, and repeatable principles governing the physical world.

Naturally aspirated kerosene fires can’t heat structural gauge steel to even the lower ranges of stress failure, no matter how much kerosene is there or how long it burns. That’s a hard and fast rule, or, if you prefer, a law of thermodynamics.

That’s all anyone needs to point out to knock the official conspiracy theory into a cocked hat.

There are often very poorly thought out out theories that are put out into the public on things. These are then ‘debunked’. Then the simple minded who believe the government story on authority think that all alternatives are false. So much so some believe that the most insane theories are intentionally put into circulation by the government itself.

The government also never releases simple evidence that it should have in its possession that would prove its story. For instance, the video footage of the plane that crashed into the pentagon. Why don’t they release it? Because the footage would match what various witnesses, including cops, say. These witnesses were interviewed while they were unaware of the official government story’s flight path. They clearly witnessed a different flight path. So the government is lying, which is why they don’t release it.

And that’s the problem. Government lies are the root cause of the theories. Government lies over and over again in big and small ways. People see the lies and make a jump of logic.

I don’t know what really happened. I just know what the government says is full of lies.

So, perhaps you and others should put in the hard work to prove the government’s story by something other than authority. You’re nearly a dozen years behind the ‘kooks’ who have proven the government story to be bullshit on many levels.

You can nail the most absurd theories, but the well researched ones remain standing and never addressed. Not even talked about. Why? Because they come from solid work. Physics, chemistry, engineering, media, and investigative reporting. So they are ignored. Instead the theories of idiots are addressed and used to smear the good solid work by ‘association’. You and many others buy it.

So, get to work proving the government theory without a bunch of rigged tests and computer models that were shaped and reshaped until they matched the narrative.

The Achilles Heel the article brings to the troother movement is why any insider would keep quiet. As said “how much would it take to not blab to the media” and “even then what’s stopping from blabbing to the media anyway and double-dip your pay”? Everyone’s heard of the troother argument and no one cares despite the fact a great many people who suffered on the day would care if it were all true. Troothers are pottering around the evidence like Creationists and Moon Landing Deniers.

Many have given (or tried to give) testimony/evidence that calls the official version into question. They have been ignored – and marginalized.

As far as the actual participants: The existence of the Stealth Bomber and fighter was kept secret for nearly 20 years. No one “talked.” How many people knew the truth about the Gulf of Tonkin (non) incident? No one involved talked – for decades. The truth that LBJ manufactured it? It was 40 years before the tapes became public knowledge – and to this day, not 1 out 10,000 is aware they even exist.

It’s a bogey – childish and simple – to believe that secrets can’t be kept very effectively for a very long time.

Tell us Eric, how much force do you think it would create when you take 30 to 60 feet of support from under 100s of tons of building over head. Do you think it would smash something with all that force? It is kind of like driving your car at 100 mph into a cement wall but with thousands of times the force! Maybe you can get Brent to give you the force of 100s of tons of building dropping just 30 feet free fall.

I am not sure who you were talking to Ray but the facts are the support gave out for many floors of building at the point where the airlines crashed. The other fact is that when you take out the support and there are many many feet to drop the tons of weight above gets moving at a high rate of speed and hits with a tremendous amount of force. What part of this do you disagree with? What part of this do you disagree with Eric? There are many pictures that show this?

Yeah right, if people could conclusive prove the Moon Landing was definitely fake then this would be breaking worldwide news. If people could prove all sciences was wrong and the Earth was young and all species could not have evolved then this would be breaking worldwide news. Hence if troothers could conclusively prove the guff they believe then this would be worldwide breaking news yet everyone has heard their stories and it has been parodied in “South Park” years ago so it’s not as if troothers are somehow holding onto hidden facts.

It’s a perfectly fine sequitor – if you & co. suppose the 9/11 conspiracy is true then it would be instant worldwide news (“Indisputable Proof Sept. 11 Was A False Flag Attack By The U.S. Government”). Other conspiracy theorists feel they are also in possession of secret information that they would be Earth-shattering if revealed.

The imbecile premise behind your imbecile paid post is that we have an independent mainstream media that investigates and reports facts at odds with the government’s press releases.

Yes, if you watch CNN, ABC, CBS, etc., you will never hear a peep that conflicts with the Official Narrative. In the same way they “reported” the “truth” about the Kennedy Assassination as per the Warren Commission, which was not questioned until many years after the events of Nov. 1963. Just as they in lockstep dutifully conveyed the “truth” about Saddam’s WMD as purveyed by the government.

The lies get deconstructed and exposed more quickly nowadays, thanks to alternative media and independent investigators (such as 911 Architects and Engineers). But not because of the mainstream media.

And yet BrentP your truth can’t make the news? The people who lost families that fateful day aren’t turning their anger at the U.S. Government and the secret operatives who posed as maintenance staff for months on end as they were weakening the structures as well as planting bombs to make sure it was a controlled explosive (not implosive) demolition? Heck when the Lusitania was found to have transported ammunition after all it still made the news many decades after it would have mattered.

Clover’s take on the world is a classic example of just how conditioned mass-man is. Especially when he says, “then it would be instant worldwide news” such a statement dovetails perfectly with this article:

Um Gil, you are clearly ignorant of many of the friends and family members who have demanded answers. Maybe you are government shill. Here you are envoking the victims with that outdated defense that the victims believe the government story. The problem is that stopped working years ago because of the family members who started demanding real answers.

And yes, 9-11, like the USS Maine, like the Lusitania, like the USS Liberty, like the Gulf of Tokin, like countless other events will have the truth come out finally 50-100+ years later when the mainstream public no longer gives a damn. It will come out again that a group of konspiracy kooks was again correct and nobody will pay attention but that day’s konspiracy kooks. That’s the problem with people like you Gil, you just shrug and say that happened decades ago without recognizing the pattern of institutional behavior.

The US federal government has been doing such crap for over a 150 years the pattern is well established. But people like yourself can’t bare to deal with coming to grips with your religious beliefs in government, in democracy, or whatever are wrong. So you shrug and believe that todays government wouldn’t do that….

The tombstone of the USA, and perhaps the whole western world should read: “It can’t happen here”.

I have never seen so stupid statements. Conspiracy? There were hundreds of witnesses to the facts and dozens of videos. The building started falling apart right where the plane hit. When you have 100s of tons of weight free falling 30 to 90 feet as in this case it is like an explosion hits! That is the laws of physics. I guess you would rather bet on thousands of hours of someone trying to make this look like the planes caused it?

It is pretty much like looking at Brent’s videos of his driving. You can make up thousands of excuses but the facts that are shown is he has road rage and is a poor and dangerous driver that should be in jail!

Is English a difficult second language for you? It’s insulting to be preached at by someone who is so inarticulate. For the sake of common courtesy, you really should learn to write in proper English and to express your thoughts clearly.

If you haven’t the decency to do at least that much, you really have no business butting into the conversations here.

This thread hasn’t been helped in the least by you or by your imbecilic colleague. Why not just toddle off somewhere else? DU would be a good site for you. Go there.

Clover, your comment is once again not coherent. What you seem to be attempting to say is that the failures initiated where the buildings were damaged. This is true and not disputed by anyone. However someone who says ‘controlled demolition’ would simply argue the wires were severed to points higher in the building. Someone such as myself that argues the government story doesn’t make sense with the structural design of the building will just tell you ‘well duh’.

The government says the floor trusses failed by fire and the building came down. The problem is that the floor trusses didn’t hold up the building and couldn’t hold it up if by some bizarre set of circumstances the loads were transferred through them. That’s where the government story falls apart.

Why doesn’t it work? Because it’s built on faith in authority. It’s built on the politics. It’s something the intellectual class came up to fit the narrative. Real root cause analysis doesn’t do that. It doesn’t care about the political narrative.

Why did the buildings fail so long after the impacts? I cannot tell you. The government story just doesn’t work for me because it does not match the way the structure works. The floors in the towers didn’t hold the building up. They might have supplied some rigidity against the wind by tying the core to the outside tube, but that doesn’t solve the problem nor is part of the government story.

The problem remains that the government story simply doesn’t work. If they really disliked “conspiracy theory” they should:
1) stop restricting access to evidence.
2) stop obviously lying.

But of course those like you keep believing them so why should they do either? Instead you imitate their behavior. You tell people something else happened and expect that repetition of that will have a mind control effect. You do that repeatedly with driving videos.

Brent, apply a high heat to the springs of your car. Will they fail immediately? Hell no. Keep that heat on them for an extended time until they get red hot and start to soften and they are likely to fail. Are people like you and Eric so mentally challenged not to understand that? Are you and Eric so concerned that what someone says would be able to be printed in the New York news that common sense does not really matter? I would say you should get your money back for that engineering degree because they did not teach you anything.

The structure of the WTC towers was such that the core could not have collapsed the way it did. Brent has explained this to you repeatedly. Some floor trusses might have given way. But the core? Not physically possible. The more you go head to head with people who actually know things about physics and architecture, the more you look like, well, a Clover.

And: WTC 7.

Plumb that one, Clover. It was not struck by a jet. There was no jet-fuel fire. How, then, do you account for a symmetric and freefall collapse? Not a toppling over, Clover. Not a partial failure of some floors or sections of the building. But the entire building dropping in seconds – symmetrically – onto its own footprint?

“apply a high heat to the springs of your car. Will they fail immediately? Hell no. Keep that heat on them for an extended time until they get red hot and start to soften and they are likely to fail”

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Tempered springs lose their temper by being heated, and allowed to cool slowly. Heating them once, even for the shortest amount of time it takes to bring them up to the range of molecular excitation, will do the job if they are allowed to cool slowly.

Break it all the way down:

Was the structural steel subjected to high enough heat to bring it into the range where the temper could have been changed? Hardly. The kind of heat required to cause loss of temper or to cause sagging couldn’t have been produced by a kerosene fire, even if it had burned for the whole day.

It’s very obvious that Brent knows what he’s talking about. You, on the other hand…..

Just to be clear, I don’t subscribe to any particular theory of failure of the WTC towers. I simply don’t find the government story credible after the truthers released the structural details.

I originally thought it was simple tube failure. Take a pop can that is undamaged. Put a large load on top of it. It will hold it. pop cans are designed to be stacked upon. For this experiment it is important for the pop can to be empty and undamaged. No dings.

Now take a step back and ping a coin off the can. Watch it collapse into its own footprint.

This is what I thought was the failure mode of the towers. Then I learned about the core, the floor trusses,etc.

Now the tube failure didn’t make sense. The core should have remained. The government published their theory, it didn’t make sense, the core, the tube, or both should have remained.

Something broke the buildings free above the impacts to start the hammering from the mass above. But nothing slows it. I can’t see these floor trusses ever holding up the building. Not for an hour. Not for five minutes. Not at all. they simply couldn’t hold anything cantilevered over the hole in the first place. What pushed the building’s structure over the edge?

If the government had come out with poor workmanship being what tipped things over I would have believed that. But their story was meant to fit a political narrative. It just stinks the way how a narrative put out that day ends up being supported by all offical reports. BS. It’s never that clean to find out why something broke in the real world.

Brent, when it all comes down to it does it make any difference what you say happened? The fact is the building started coming down when the things that were supporting the building above where each plane hit were weakened by heat and gave out! I do not know what was holding the building floors up at the time and you do not know either. The experts would even have to guess because no one lived through it close up. The fact is the building was still standing when hit by the planes and the heat is what eventually brought everything down. If you say that is impossible then I guess you are saying it all never happened.

If we would drop a sledge hammer onto your head from 60 feet above then you would drop like a pile of bricks. Pretty much the same way the building came down when the supports gave out from the heat.

I see no purpose in attempting to communicate rationally with a person whose engineering knowledge is such that he equates a sledgehammer (one word, Clover) falling on a human body with the way structural steel reacts to fire/impact.

I’ll just leave you with one observation that might – might – cause a spark to flicker somewhere inside that head of yours.

If Brent were struck on the head by a sledgehammer, he would not drop at freefall speed. There would be a measurable difference between his rate of descent and the rate of descent of a body falling without any resistance (other than air resistance) beneath it.

I’ve been watching it from afar, marveling at the sheer idiocy of your thinking. Unsophisticated, brutish, churlish, thuggish, pig-headed, ignoramus, cretin, retard, idiot, fool, knave…at times like these I wish my decent vocabulary were simply excellent, such that I might find terms sufficiently superlative to even begin to describe the wasted space between your ears.

The sucking vacuum where once a human brain existed; a maw into which intelligence disappears to die like the event horizon of some giant Idiot Black Hole, the ideas paused in time dilation stretched out and spaghettified like serfs on a medieval rack screaming their last.

Ideas tortured to death by a stupidity so monstrous it consumes the world.

A stupidity so lumbering, so vast, thermonuclear warheads of piercingly intelligent debate disappear into the folds of its rolling flesh with a dull “Thump!” their ferocious fires extinguished by blubbery nothingness.

You’re the Jabba the Hut of stupidity, the ultimate expression of dumb.

But please, don’t die; be very careful. We NEED people like you! You will serve as an example of what went wrong, and how to avoid it when we rebuild civilization after you’ve destroyed it.

I’d say this explication of the situation is more than merely superlative!

Three cheers, sir! Especially, for this one:

“A stupidity so lumbering, so vast, thermonuclear warheads of piercingly intelligent debate disappear into the folds of its rolling flesh with a dull “Thump!” their ferocious fires extinguished by blubbery nothingness”

Nice methylamine. Who has air between their ears? You typed a couple hundred words and said nothing? Why? You said how I was all wrong about what I said but did not bother saying what I was wrong about?
At least give us your interpretation on why the buildings came down. Video evidence and eye witnesses seems not enough for you? If someone smacked you in the head would you question if it really happened?

Others on this thread have explained so very capably just a few of the massive holes in the Official State Explanation of Reality As Seen Through Statist Glass.

I agree with and amplify their responses.

You refusal to research it on your own displays your hopeless–because self-imposed–ignorance.

No further convincing will help.

I spend my efforts on people who are still that–people–not automatons-of-their-own-making.

I sometimes debate your kind to sharpen my own arguments, to crystallize in my mind what is salient and true.

On occasion a non-clover arises; a reasonable person, clinging to the Official Narrative but still imbued with that spark of life. And I’ll engage with him because I see another Neo floundering in the sewer outside the Matrix. Let him aboard the Nebachudnezzar, teach him the truth.

You’re a turd floating in the sewer; why would I airlift a turd? It can’t be educated and it’ll stink up the place.

Clover, I don’t have the energy to try and parse your incoherent babble. It appears you want to be lazy and trust ‘experts’. Experts who are state intellectuals. That is they make a living finding reasons to support whatever the political power structure says. Which is exactly what they did.

These state intellectuals simply eliminate possibilities because they don’t fit the narrative. Did you know that government investigators did not look for explosives? They did not even consider it. This is how they do things. They automatically eliminate as impossible anything that doesn’t fit the narrative already established. They had to come up with a fire-induced failure story so they did. Everything else was off the table from the get go.

I notice that once again instead of using facts and logic you turn to violent murderous imagery. You’re really a despicable person.

You keep pounding your little pink pud over this lie. The point you insist on ignoring is that nothing happened during the time the kerosene was burning off to heat the steel to ‘a couple thousand degrees’.

Both “Clover” and “Gil” have been coming here for years – years! Neither will reveal its true name or provide any information about its educational or professional background (unlike virtually every regular here). We did some checking on them and discovered a few very interesting things which lead us to believe they are, in fact, paid shills – shills for Uncle.

Wasn’t there a building in Spain, or off in Chechnya or someplace like that recently, which burnt for hour after hour and never collapsed? Are we being told that American built skyscrapers are in fact inferior and thus more likely to fail than foreign built skyscrapers? Hmmmmm.

Oddly, the Empire State Building did not freefall collapse onto its own footprint.

And of course, there’s WTC 7. Not hit by an airplane. No jet fuel fire. So the “explanation” given by the government for the collapse of the Twin Towers does not apply. Yet it fell exactly the same way. Symmetric collapse at freefall speed onto its own footprint.

Tell us Eric, did you see the videos of the buildings coming down? Tell us what you think caused it. I may have missed that explanation? I need a good laugh. The facts shown and viewed by thousands seems not to be enough for you.

What evidence do you have that you were born? Maybe you are not really alive if you have no real undisputable evidence. Maybe you are just a government conspiracy to make us think there is an Eric out there.

First, the issue isn’t whether any of the given alternatives (e.g., controlled demolition) is “undisputable.” It is that the government’s story is very disputable – because it is rife with problems. These have been pointed out to you with supporting facts and explanations by people who possess specific technical knowledge far above your own, in the relevant areas (i.e., physics, engineering, architecture) and that alone ought to carry enough weight to at least cause you to reflect a little. Instead, you belittle and parrot – the Clover’s stock in trade.

I have no doubt that you also bought in toto the government’s Gulf of Tonkin lie, its lies about Saddam and his “WMD,” the lies about Jessica Lynch and Pat Tilman… and every other lie. So long as the government tells you something, that something must be so, ipso facto.

Has it ever crossed your mind, Clover, that the government which we “undisputedly” know has lied to us, deliberately manipulated us, contemplated – and committed – murder of innocents to further a political agenda – might just do so again?

In all the years you’ve been emitting your intellectual crepitations* here, you’ve been repeatedly exposed as uninformed and flat-out wrong yet you’re possessed of absolute, righteous certainty and never accept correction or admit when you have been proved an ignoramus.

Who are you, Clover? You are the anti-Leonardo. A failure at everything, a master of nothing.

* “Having been worsted…the Demon departed indignant and murmuring to himself after having emitted a crepitation of no small size, which left a foul stench in the chamber for several days afterwards.”

“Richard Gage, AIA, is a San Francisco Bay Area architect and a member of the American Institute of Architects. He has been an architect for over 23 years and has worked on most types of building construction, including numerous fire-proofed, steel-framed buildings. Most recently, he worked on the construction documents for a $400M mixed-use urban project with 1.2 million square feet of retail, a parking structure, and 320,000 square feet of mid-rise office space—altogether with about 1,200 tons of steel framing.”

Actually Gil many “real” architects and engineers have questioned the official story repeatedly and still do. I personally know several mechanical engineers that question the official story. One electrical engineer I know pointed out that this very same government, which stores the remains of crashed aircraft for analyses often taking years, wasted no time in disposing of the the forensic evidence in what is arguably the biggest criminal case in this century. That should not even make sense to you Gil.

One of the few things any government including this one is typically good at is covering up its crimes and mistakes. It is ususally only after the guilty parties and their victims are long dead and buried that the facts come out. Have a look around this site: http://www.hss.energy.gov/healthsafety/ohre/
This is “your” government ‘fessing up to what horrible things they did to US citizens in the name of Cold War era research. That’s just one of numerous examples of the US government abusing the people is has been entrusted to protect. Notice how all this came out only after those who could be charged have shed the mortal coil.

What is really telling about your positions is the way that both you and clover carefully avoid any real discussion of the collapse of WTC 7. That cannot be logically explained in any other reasonable way than staged severing of structural columns. That is the sole method of causing a near free fall collapse of a structure of that type so neatly in its own footprint. So I surmise that you two are are either engaging in some shared delusion akin to religious fervor or you are both shills for the regime.

Nietzsche said “Everything the state says is a lie, everything it has is stolen.” I would argue that the state does occasionally tell the truth, but only when it suits their purposes. As far as everything they have being stolen, that’s indisputable. The state is seldom productive and when they are it is with stolen resources. No, the people that gravitate toward “public service” are consumptive. Their appetites for the belongings of the productive are never sated.

Government’s girth, built from political power and stolen private treasure expands continually until checked by a superior outside force or the system finally collapses under its own weight. But in the mean time, its denizens will make every effort to exploit any crisis for their own benefit. And as history proves, when there is no good crisis immediately available to exploit, they will cultivate, foment and create crises as needed.

It saddens me to think that you two are so comfortably ensconced in your little cloverian cocoons of delusion that you can’t even consider the fact that criminals (i.e. evil people) seek out government employment so they may more readily ply their trade. Perhaps it is because you are among their ranks?

OK Eric, are you saying that heat has no affect on steel? It does not make it expand or break easier? What about all the other building materials? Heat does not affect cement, walls or any of the other building materials?

If you believe all of that would you be willing to risk your life with you so called facts? Would you be willing to sit under tons of building while someone heated up the supports to a couple thousand degrees? Maybe we should try it. Better yet maybe we should have your expert engineer try it. Did you or the engineer take into consideration that much of the supports were taken out when the plane hit. If you take a 4 leg table and took out one and weakened another would you be willing to sit under it if we added a few thousand pounds to it and heated up the steel legs that were left? I want to see you support your theory!

Do you know what a thermometer is? That “heat” is not one value? That structural steel is not affected (compromised is the word you ought to have used)) by “heat” unless that “heat” is hot enough – and hot enough for long enough? A jet fuel fire is not hot enough, Clover. And this one did not even burn for long enough. Most of the kerosene was consumed in seconds – the few moments/minutes following the impacts. After that, it became an ordinary building fire. Office materials; wood, paper – etc. Absolutely not even remotely hot enough to do anything to compromise structural steel.

And none of this addresses the critical issue of the building’s central core. It could not have fallen down – straight down, collapsing onto itself – as we were told happened. It is not physically possible, absent other factors not given in the Official Story.

Why not read the carefully reasoned – and supported with facts – critiques of the Official Story? Gage, et al – these are men with expertise and knowledge far superior to yours. Perhaps you might learn something.

Oh, yes. I forget. You have heard the government’s story. Nothing else to see here. Move along, folks.

And creationists can find scientists who back them up and yet they can’t get anywhere. By the same token, you know I’m not going to link anything to the WTC7 collapse because it will be a link to the “official narrative” just as you readily linked “proof” which inevitably is a troother site.

“Creationists” are not scientists, or at least, creationism isn’t science. It is based on faith.

But Richard Gage and the other 1,700 architects and engineers base their claims on facts – math, physics and engineering. Things that can be challenged and tested and verified (or not).

You never address the facts they bring up. You just dismiss them – the engineers and architects and physicists – as “troothers.” It’s the equivalent of a child holding its hands over its ears and screeching, nah nah nah! I can’t hear you!

Eric you are a joke. Heat does nothing to steel you say. Did the experts tell you this? Why is it that if someone wants to remove rusted bolts or thousands of other reasons they heat up the steel to make it expand, bend, break or cut. Are you saying this is never done? It is done on steel better than you structural steel.

There was also more than jet fuel in those fires! Does the anger of government have the ability to over ride facts and physics?

I want to see it in your own words actually happened that day? Like I said, I would like a good laugh a day?

My body produces “heat,” Clover. Will it “affect” (that is, compromise) the structural integrity of steel if I lay down on it?

How about if I hold a Bic lighter under it?

I did not state that “heat” has no effect on steel. I stated that steel must be heated to a certain (very high) temperature before it has an effect – that is, before the steel is structurally compromised.

Apparently, you cannot read.

And: When steel is cut, Clover, one uses an oxy-acetylene torch. Do you know how much heat such a torch produces, Clover?

How much heat does burning kerosene produce? A paper/wood fire? What is the heat at which structural steel begins to weaken?

These are just a few of the questions your closed mind won’t ask – perhaps because you are afraid of the answers…

Well Boothes If “sheep” is a derogatory term someone who goes with the crowd just because then I believe term “goat” is a opposite derogatory term for someone who goes against the crowd just because. Once again if Sept. 11 “facts” are so true and dangerous then you’d think people would disappear or wind up in “accidents” similar to the TV show “The X Files”. Instead troothers yak all day long and host web sites and yet are still alive and well for exposing such deadly trooths.

Nonetheless you and Eric have nil metallurgical experience. I have seen lead being melted and molded while the stainless steel container holding the molten hasn’t melted the heat makes it rather malleable (yes from ordinary hot temperature) – it starts to take the form of putty in that it hold its form yet it can be easily bent and twisted hence prolonged exposure of the burning jet fuel weakened the structural steel and it couldn’t hold up the weight of the stories above it: simple physics.

Actually Gil, you do not know what my level of metallurgical expertise is. From a practical standpoint I have actually cast items in metal myself, not merely watched; metals including lead alloys, bronze, brass, sterling silver and karat gold. I was performing lost wax casting in a jewelry store, professionally, at sixteen years old.

My grandfather and father taught me blacksmithing quite young (before I was ten). I have actually hand forged and tempered my own springs, knives, tomahawks, fire steels and other specialized tools over the years. In addition to this I have engaged in steel fabrication, welding and cutting (using MIG / TIG / stick and oxy/fuel gas) both on the job and off. So I have a very clear understanding of the effects of varying levels of heat applied to many different metals.

As I’ve told you before, I am an Instrumentation & Controls technician with over 32 years of experience in my field. A big part of what I do involves measuring temperature in and around steam boilers. These are typically fairly high temperatures and they are often applied to steel. So I have seen the effects of prolonged (years, sometimes decades) heat exposure to steel.

Perhaps you saw a phenomenon where a stainless steel vessel became malleable at the melt point of lead (621.5F for pure lead). I doubt it. But not knowing the actual alloys and temperatures involved I can’t be sure. You may have also seen a chemical reaction occur similar to the cupellation process when assaying gold. In other words, depending on conditions, exposure to the lead itself may have damaged the stainless steel vessel’s structure.

Stainless steel is hardly “indestructible” and is known to be susceptible to attack by various chemicals; things you wouldn’t think of like chlorinated solvents. Chemical reactions are frequently augmented by the application of heat or the presence of a catalyst. Depending on the heat source (Was it electric resistive or induction? Fuel gas? Was it a carburizing or oxidizing flame?) you may have seen chemical, galvanic and thermal phenomena occurring simultaneously.

The point is, my grammatically challenged rube, with the WTC collapse we had jet fuel (kerosene, fuel oil, whatever your preference) and atmospheric air available for combustion initially. That was consumed fairly quickly. That left combustible solids from the aircraft and the office for fuel: upholstery, paper, plastics, cardboard, wall coverings and the like. You may believe these materials would generate enough heat to compromise structual steel in the presence of air (20.9% O2). I do not. Eric did a very nice analysis of this (complete with math to back it up) some time ago. You should go find it and read it. With WTC 7 there was no jet fuel. Explain that.

The government of its day has lied to the public innumerable times down through the ages to accomplish the ends of the insiders. Often the church and the media aid and abet them. The people will run around frantically like a flock of sheep when spooked by those they look up to. It doesn’t take much to spook people who simply won’t question what they are being told by official sources into giving up their liberty, their treasure and even their lives. Hence the frequent allusion to Homo Ovinae Americanus on this site. Or in language you should be able to clearly grok Gil: Baaa-aaa-aaa.

Editor’s note:Clover copied and pasted the paragraph below without quotation marks or attribution, hoping to pass it off as his own material. I have added quotation marks to avoid any confusion.

Tell us Eric which part of this do you disagree with?

“Given the thermal expansion of steel, a 150°C temperature difference from one location to another will produce yield-level residual stresses. This produced distortions in the slender structural steel, which resulted in buckling failures. Thus, the failure of the steel was due to two factors: loss of strength due to the temperature of the fire, and loss of structural integrity due to distortion of the steel from the non-uniform temperatures in the fire.”

Like I told you, steel expands or distorts under high heat. Yes if you took a piece of steel that is at freezing temperatures and you laid on it there would be an affect on that steel although small. When you add hundreds of degrees to parts of a steel beam it becomes distorted and joints will break. Do your engineering friends disagree with that? Do your so called engineering experts say heat does nothing to steel? Maybe you are right. Our school system has major problems. Even mechanic with a 75 IQ knows that steel is affected when he heats it. Do your engineers have a lower IQ than that?

Now you’re copying ans pasting material written by someone else without quotation marks or attribution and trying to pass it off as your own. That first paragraph was not written by you. I have therefore added the quotation marks to clear up any misunderstanding.

I doubt you have the first clue what “yield-level residual stresses” means. You are in the deep end of the pool, Clover – and don’t know how to swim.

Well, Clover, it’s good to know you are making progress. High heat – yes, indeed. Now, the question becomes: How high, exactly? For how long? And, what sources can produce the necessary heat – and maintain it?

Flashing an oxy-acetylene torch over a piece of steel for a moment will not cause it to fail. The cutting flame must be maintained.

And as Brent/Boothe have repeatedly tried to point out to you: There is the issue of the core of each building. Even if we accept that floor trusses failed due to fires weakening steel, this does not – cannot – explain the vertical collapse of the core. Falling over – ok. Partial failure – ok. But it could not have vertically collapsed – fallen straight down onto its footprint – absent the base and subsequent structural supports having been pulled away at exactly the same moment.

And then, we return to WT7 – which you and Gil and all the other shills never want to discuss. Because it washes away the Official Story like spring rain clears the birdshit off my driveway.

The critical elements of the Official Story – a jet impact and subsequent jet fuel fire – are absent. So what caused the structural steel of WTC 7 to weaken – then fail – such that the entire building collapsed at freefall speed onto its own footprint? Not a partial collapse of some floors or portions of the building. A sudden, symmetric, freefall vertical drop onto its own footprint.

Ever wonder why, though the collapse of the Twin Towers is constantly brought up by government and it lapdog media, the existence of WTC7 is not even known by large swaths of the public?

Clover, stop using terms and words you don’t understand. It just makes you look even more ignorant.

Furthermore the only steel that could have an issue with an office fire was the floor trusses. The government intellectuals in their struggle to claim the fires pushed the buildings over the edge decided on the floor trusses pulling down the core and outer walls as they failed. Here’s the problem, the weaker member has to pull down the stronger member. Normally the weaker member simply fails.

The government intellectuals have to claim the thin and relatively weak floor trusses have to be failing from the fire, soft, weakened, etc while at the same time being strong and pulling down the core.

It only makes sense to people like you Clover, those who bend reality to match the narratives of the political class.

Clover, you ignorant slut.
How many times have I stated that the floor trusses could have failed from fire? That’s all your reference (in your yet to be approved or canned comment) to some lame skeptic site says.

Yes the floor trusses could fail from fire. But the floor trusses did not hold up the building. The structural plans show that clearly. The floor trusses held up the floors between the structural elements of the building.

I disagree that weakened, burned away, thin, light weight floor trusses could pull down the core and the outer tube structure. Your dear government says they did. This does not make sense. It would be pulling your car with the parking brake on with a shoelace while a candle burns through said shoelace.

Brent you are a joke. You need to get your money back from that engineering degree. You say floor trusses do nothing? I tell you what, drop a couple of thousand pounds on your ceiling or floor above where they fail and see if the walls are unaffected. If they are tied together the walls are likely to be pulled in with the ceiling. Do you disagree with that? If Eric’s engineers are as brilliant as you are I can see that his so called facts are worthless. Oh, I forgot, he has no facts but just guesses. It is pretty hard to disprove guesses that have no basis of facts.

Yet for some reason he edited out the very relevant;
“No buckling can be seen in any of the video and photographic evidence, only the instantaneous onset of a telescoping collapse, accompanied by explosions. ”

I wonder if he bothered to read the next segment “The Collapse”? Pretty sure not or he would have found another site to plagiarize as this follows his copied material;

” Note that the article never revisits the question of how the numerous undamaged perimeter columns failed simultaneously, even though there is no evidence they experienced significant heating from the fires”

Clover, I already addressed that ‘cite’ of yours. It’s a typical debunking article which slanders by association engineers who have valid disagreement with the government’s intellectuals.

You lie again, I stated the floor trusses held up the floors. They provided, as a system, together, a connection between the tube and the core, but held neither up. The failure of one or more floor trusses results in the floor being supported falling down to the next floor. I could even accept progressive collapse internal to the tube’s structure. That is of the floors themselves. But given the information available they could not and would not pull down the tube or the core.

Now their failure could make the tube and core more vunerable to wind load and earthquake. Neither was unusual on that day and thus unlikely to bring about a failure. But there is a funny thing about wind load and earthquake. They are side loads. They push the building to the side.

Simply put the government story doesn’t make sense and those who defend it use slander, ridicule, and other social techniques rather than scientific ones or engineering principles. Or they simply repeat the same government theory as if it were biblical text. This is not an acceptable argument.

Now when you can present an actual argument that bolsters the floor truss failure theory, that deals with the facts that
a) The load transfered does not change as the truss fails. The floors are not gaining weight as they fail.
b) when the floor trusses fail they relieve the core and tube of load. The load falls to the undamaged sections below.
c) When you pull weakened heated thin gauge steel the large I beam it is attached to does not fail, the piece you’re pulling on does.
d) use comparable structures as a analogies.

Gil, how did the floor truss failure translate into a structural failure of damaged tube and core? Feel free to summarize in your own words from the government report. I would be surprised if you can even comprehend the government report well enough to summarize the theory it presents.

This is an open book comprehension test. All you have to do is summarize a small part of the government’s report on the collapse of the towers. Don’t copy and paste another person’s summary. Put it in your own words.

Nice Eric. The video showed us nothing. It showed a guy making things up. He brought up how the structure was bent. I told you that. It was bent by heat and this caused the failure of joints he is talking about.

I had enough. If you really want to believe the earth is square then go for it. I look at the facts not with someone’s guesses to make some money and get in the news.

There is no evidence provided and statements like someone might have been working on the elevators? I guess that is all his basis of fact. There might have been someone working on the elevators but he does not even know? There was structural failure but his only theory is explosives? There was one hell of an explosion when the planes hit. Those planes were not on person mini planes.

This is it for me. I had enough of your theories with zero facts. I liked the one where he said steel was melting and it was in a video from a mile away or more? How did he figure out it was molten metal? Oh, it just sounded good to say. There was a lot of different materials and metals in the building. Aluminum was one of them.

Eric, that was an interesting talk. I wish he had been more technical but his audience probably wasn’t an engineering crowd.

Clover, what I disliked about the talk was that he offered an explanation for the evidence he found. Why? Because that fuels trolls like yourself. But I do not fault him. It’s human nature to do so and it is standard practice in analyzing failures to do so. I did it today with a product I work on wrt an internal test, although I had to explain why the one I changed did not fail. But I digress.

The government intellectuals who came up with the official theory neglected explosives as a cause of failure. This is not good method. When an engineer does failure analysis with a possible modes off the table the chances of correctly determining the cause of failure drop.

If I were to discuss that evidence I would leave it up to the listener to decide what fits the evidence. I would show beams from tests that demonstrated various failure modes and leave it to the audience to make the conclusion of which one looked most like the columns of the WTC. But that’s just how I deal with sensitive subjects. I put evidence and knowledge on the table and let people decide. It generally puts those with faith like yourself in a difficult spot. You of course just throw insults instead.

In the end, the floor truss theory was written to back up the political narrative. It was all they could come up with given what was off the table.

My challenge to Gil applies to you as well. Show me you can at least comprehend the official government theory of collapse by summarizing how the floor trusses pulled the rest of the building down when they failed in your own words. If you can do that, you can at least be taken seriously on this topic. If not you have zero credibility. It means you haven’t done even the most basic homework required for this debate.

OK Brent I will give you one chance to show us any facts? You said that the government ” official theory neglected explosives as a cause of failure” ? OK Brent you may be correct on that one. Show us your evidence there was an explosive involved? Do you think the government or a person or group for that matter if there was no evidence of such how are they not going to neglect it? Show us your evidence? Not what someone makes up! Brent there was no evidence!

All we’ve been trying to do here – all A&E have been trying to do – is show you that the Official Story does not make sense. Not present our own theory – much less claim our own theories as fact.

You, on the other hand, accept as incontrovertible truth whatever the government tells you – because the government told you. Irrespective of your own lack of expertise in any of the relevant disciplines. Irrespective of anomalies (and much more) that have been pointed out to you by experts that you are unwilling to even consider.

Such as:

How could the cores of the twin towers have collapsed vertically, onto their own footprint? Not topple over. But collapse – straight down?

Why do photos of the columns show precise shears – as if by cutting?

Why did firemen report “rivers of molten steel” in the basement?

How could WTC 7 have collapsed symmetrically at freefall speed?

If jet impacts and jet fuel fire undermined the structural integrity of the Towers – notwithstanding that they were specifically designed to withstand just such impacts and fire – what about WTC 7? It was not struck by airplanes (just falling debris) and the only fires were ordinary fires – paper, wood, etc. – not even remotely hot enough to “weaken” structural steel.

How is it that a guy who – according to the government’s story, mind – could barely pilot a single engine Cessna “straight and level” at altitude managed to execute high-performance maneuvers in a heavy multi-engine commercial jet, including a steep descent at several hundred knots and then pull up and fly straight and level literally feet off the deck (the surface of the earth) without crashing, before pile-driving his plane into the Pentagon?

Why won’t the government release video of the plane coming in? Why is there no video of the plane coming in? DC – I lived there – is a tourist mecca. There would have been thousands of people milling about, many of them with video cameras. The area around the Pentagon/Mall is also heavily surveilled. Yet, no video…

Why? How?

Why did the facade of the Pentagon show no initial damage other than an appx. 20 foot diameter hole? Why did the wings not damage the facade? Why did the engines not leave furrows in the grass? Why where they not sheared off? Where are the engines?

Gee, Booth, Brent & co., I’m just going to link official sites while you link to troothers sites.

“I believe the towers came down from prolonged exposure to fire after the jetliners crashed into them.”

“I believe the towers came down because workers who were assigned to remove asbestos for months on end were in fact weakening the structure as well as planting explosives while C.I.A. agents hijacked the planes, set it autopilot then parachuted to safety.”

As always thank you Gil and Clover. Neither of you ever mentioned your credentials, or even what you do for a living. Anyhow, “I believe” I blocked your fucking range of ip addresses so hopefully we get a break from stupid for a bit.

dom, you must feel satisfied like I would after swatting a mosquito that had been sucking your blood time after time or buzzing your ear for an hour.

You guys have been asking what Gil/Clover did since, what, July? Boy do they ever avoid answering questions.

You guys voiced how he/she/it was a 9 to 5’er and how they never were on after that time. I think maybe they took notes and passed it onto their boss. I’ve noticed on other websites the clover types have uncharacteristically/recently been online 2-10p.m. It could be a lot of smucks, but it doesn’t seem like it. They’ve got a second shift! Ha. Reeks of desperation.

Clover/Gil was fun to read about at first, but now, it’s getting old. I do hope you prevail.

We let Clover/Gil posts get through – but not all of them. The few we do allow to see the light of day serve a valuable purpose: Intellectual dissection of the Clover “mind.” It is helpful to understand one’s enemy. And it is heartening to know how weak-minded our enemies are!

First off Gil, the only link I’ve provided recently was to an “official” website exposing the dastardly things the government did to Americans in the name of radiological research. You conspicuously ignored the “official” site when it impugned your beloved government. You suffer from confirmation bias at its finest, old bean.

You keep going on about those of us in the skeptics’ camp not providing “facts” to back up our theories. For the most part, we don’t even offer theories. Only questions and possibilities that make sense based on physics, thermodynamics and photo / video evidence. The “official” WTC story is fraught with numerous discrepancies that should raise reasonable doubts with any critical thinker. By the same token, there is no way you can provide any irrefutable “official” facts either. When a group of people in suits and uniforms tell us the “official” story, the fact that these story tellers are tax feeders and government sycophants does not make it true.

I know for a fact based on personal experience (four years spent enlisted in Uncle Sam’s airplane club) that government officials will lie and cover things up. The higher on goes up the chain of government, it would stand to reason that the lies would get bigger. You don’t want to acknowledge that because you are a true believer when it comes to government. It would stand to reason that you are either gainfully unemployed (i.e. on the dole) or working for the government (i.e. also on the dole). You and clover are both pathetic creatures.

Clover, I never claimed explosives did anything. I stated the government did not consider explosives. One does not lead to another. Why do you continually demand I defend arguments I never made?

I asked you to simply show you understand the government’s theory. You cannot rise to that simple and easy challenge thus you are not serious about this topic and just a troll. You cannot be taken seriously.

Gil, you have not bothered to meet the simple challenge of showing understanding of the government theory of collapse. Thus you can not be taken seriously.

It is one thing to understand and support a theory from government intellectuals. It’s quite another to just blindly believe it without a clue about the details.

Gee, Boothe, even a house fire will weaken a house frame to the point that when it is sufficient damaged the house will: fall on its own footprint. After all, where else can the building fall? Gravity operates like that. You keep pottering around saying “but experts said it would withstand a Empire State Building-like crash”. Did they really expect a jetliner deliberately smashed full speed and laden with fuel to occur as opposed to guy who was lost and tried to avoid the building and flying slow? The buildings actually did withstand the initials impacts yet prolonged fires weaken the structure. Those here who claim metallurgical or blacksmithing experience would note a metal become soft and malleable under heat long before it’s close to its melting point.

A house is a (usually) wood-framed building. Wood does not = structural steel. Each behaves differently – but I expect you know this. And: House fires – if not put out – typically result in partial collapse. Rarely does the whole thing just fall onto its own footprint all at once. There will typically be a caved in roof, but some walls standing – sometimes all of them. The chimney/brickwork almost always survive. They are not pulled down as the walls fall. Interesting, that….

You might want to read the government theory of the collapse of the towers Gil. Well if you can understand it. Then you’d realize how stupid you look with that last comment.

Being able to comprehend and articulate the government theory of the collapse should be the first requirement of anyone who wishes to defend the government theory. If you can’t do that you’re just the ying to the UFO’s took out the towers crowd’s yang.

…. they get overtime too? Plus a bonus for derailing the conversation? Either that or, WTF kind of person spends a year or more doing what he/she/it does?

He/she/it has certainly been successful here. How-freaking-ever; I’ve learned more about Nine Eleven than I ever wanted to, so in that respect things have backfired, if in fact he/she/it is on a payroll.

Either way, he/she/it is a troll. I couldn’t imagine looking at myself in the mirror each day if I was them. I suppose if they don’t have a conscious that’s no problem.

Since all the engineering and scientific arguments have been effectively made. My only sentiment is that it couldn’t have happened to a better city. Sure there were innocents who died there and it bothers me that me or my family couldv’e been visiting when such an atrocious act was commited. I feel for the victims family. I feel for the nice and kind and respectable north-easterners, no matter how small your numbers are. We are all pawns of the captains and kings in this world it could’ve been anyone of us. It doesn’t matter you are the capital of the creeps and captains. Because I know you’re just trying to get by in life in NYC, again implying the rare but nice NYC person. But still is it just me or do middle easterner’s just naturally know how rude and cocky easterners are on average? At the very minimum you’d think they were western taxpayers who were mad at all the loot be passed to NYC (UN) and D.C.. Are middle easterners really teapartiers? Yes according to SLPC.

Now this middle eastern terrorist at the very least they know who the economic purveyers and political rulers are of all trash. You got to give them the so called government claimed enemy credit on that one right? I mean if I were a terrorist I’d target the head of the snake too. Still I’m a peaceful guy myself. But maybe a better answer is to follow the money. Who benefited the most from 911. That answer like always is not too shocking, it certainly wasn’t the victims families. Add it all up including the economics along with the engineering debate, still frames of the second jet (missing windows) just prior to slamming in to the building. And as Eric keeps pointing out the WTC 7 debacle.

See the proven motives of our government with “operation Northwood”. Like the Gulf of Tonkin official story this one also stinks.

What I take away from Nahhnleeevven is this: The government is capable of absolutely anything. Including mass murder. The elements responsible would have your family or mine (or anyone else’s, perhaps even their own) tortured and killed in the most horrible ways imaginable – if it would further some important (to them) agenda, such as the enhancement of their power.

The analogy of wood to steel is fair: both are structural frames. Structural steel isn’t some magical iron/titanium/tungsten mixture rather it’s similar to standard steel: mostly iron and carbon. Hence it’s if you like to say “jet fuel is just kerosene” then “structural steel is little more than steel” the melting point is higher but not that much higher. You think only modern technology can soften steel to the point of malleability thus steel could only exist within the last century.

The WTC Towers and building 7 were not only made of entirely different materials, which react very differently to stress, the way they were built was entirely different. To compare the structure of a two or three story wood-framed house with a 100 story steel-framed office building such as the WTC towers – which had a steel core and an outer perimeter, with floor trusses between them – is… an epic imbecility.

Yes, it’s a straight forward analogy: load-bearing beams could no longer bear the load hence a collapse whether it be wood or steel. The reason towers didn’t topple like a tree or a domino is because the impact site was too high. Had the towers been struck near the bottom then the towers would have toppled and much sooner.
Nonetheless here’s a scientist who can answer your idiotic FAQs:

A simple long shape like railroad track is not the same as the structure of the WTC.

The government’s story is that the fire weakened the thin trusses which then sagged, failed, and brought the building down.

The problem is that the WTC towers were a conventional box frame structure, the core and a tube structure, the outer walls. The floor trusses held up the floors. The people. the office stuffs. they did not hold up the building.

What we should have been left with would have been an outer shell and inner box structure with failed floors inside. Remember, the government story regarding the fire is that it would not have done much to the core structure or the tube structure. It’s that the floor trusses failed and pulled both causing the collapse.

What happens when the weaker member of an assembly fails? Does it pull the stronger members with it?

My advice to you is to immediately file a patent on the process you describe. You’ll have to give it a proper-sounding name; “Camp-Fire Rail-Tie Bending” is much too plain for such a scientific breakthrough.

Well, you would not want to bend an I-beam with fire and then use it for structure. Only a moron would do that. And yes, I get that you were being sarcastic by calling me a gotdamn genius. So, no shit you wouldn’t bend an I beam into an L instead of just joining two at a 90 degree angle.

You do not have to completely melt an engine block to get it to fail. Just run it without oil for awhile and it will get hot enough to fail on its own.

You can make wood beams fail without fire. You can chop through them until they collapse under the weight they are holding.

You don’t have to chop completely through a wooden beam to make it fail either. You could take several wood beams, put the max weight they are designed to take and then start chopping through with an ax. Do you think that all beams will fail at the exact same chop? Didn’t think so.

I-beams are created to handle stress. No shit Sherlock. But Ibeams that have been heated that much for that long are not designed to hold up that much weight for much longer.

One of the things that engineers take into consideration is how much weight the beams can handle under static conditions.

Engineers are not perfect. The Sunshine Skyway Bridge in Florida was built from both ends to meet in the middle. Oops. On the first try, the two sides met in the middle with one side higher than the other by about 3 feet.

Engineers design things to work and then scratch their heads when the less than ideal fails.

Show me any architect on the design team for WTC and tell me that none of them were scratching their heads when the building came down.

“Damn, I thought we designed it to stand up.”

Give me any piece of machinery or show me the blueprint to any building and guarantee I can find someone who can bring it down or destroy it.

You think terrorist groups have no architects in their midst? Hmm. Maybe the 19 crazies who hijacked the planes didn’t have training in architecture or engineering. But they were probably told by one other member of the terrorist groups that if you fly a really big plane into the building about this far from the top and make sure you use a plane that has plenty of fuel, you can make it come down. We did the math. It will take some time, but it will come down. Allahu Akbar.

Then again, maybe the Bush administration paid the Saudis to send terrorists here to take flying lessons, hijack planes, fly them into WTC while behind the scenes Seal Team 6 set charges on every five floors below 90 and detonated all the bombs in a coordinated blast to contain the building(s) with a vertical drop using the hijacked planes as cover just because Sadam Hussein would not let UN inspectors search for phantom weapons of mass destruction after W’s daddy kicked Sadam out of Kuwait and then stopped at the Iraqi border.

Hmm. Which is the absolute truth. I don’t know. I can’t prove or disprove either. Which is more plausible?

“Then again, maybe the Bush administration paid the Saudis to send terrorists here to take flying lessons, hijack planes, fly them into WTC while behind the scenes Seal Team 6 set charges on every five floors below 90 and detonated all the bombs in a coordinated blast to contain the building(s) with a vertical drop using the hijacked planes as cover just because Sadam Hussein would not let UN inspectors search for phantom weapons of mass destruction after W’s daddy kicked Sadam out of Kuwait and then stopped at the Iraqi border. ”

Goddam, bum. You just demonstrated how to drag a whole bunch of pieces of the official story into a pile and drizzle a little sarcastic shit on them to form a perfect-fucking-put-down.

Come to think of it, there has never in recorded history been a steel-frame skyscraper that collapsed due to fire.

So the twin towers must have been unique. Possible, not probable.

I have an open mind, but it rejects bad arguments.

The classic “pancake theory” of the WTC collapse is just one hair shy of pure voodoo…the shoddiest explanation possible.

BTW we should talk some time of pure thermodynamics; as in, what was the heat capacity of the materials on those floors, versus the amount of energy added by burning materials…and hence the greatest expected delta-T?

Given your near-savant explanations of mechanics I expect it’ll be right up your alley.

Did I say that it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that WTC collapsed because of failed materials courtesy of a jet fuel fire?

No, I did not. I pointed out that I have seen materials fail under other applications and I find the theory POSSIBLE. Before I drink THEIR koolaid, meaning that I accept their explanation as the gospel truth, I want another theory that is equally if not more possible. Convince me that their explanation is pure, unadulterated bullshit. Prove that there are more plausible scenarios.

All I have gotten from truthers is that the government planted the bombs and blew up the building. Forensics reports show explosive residue on the superstructure. Fine, that SUPPORTS the theory. It does not PROVE it.

I did not see explosions every few floors to collapse the superstructure when the buildings fell. Afterall, if the theory that weakened materials caused the first collapse and then the “domino effect” collapse for the rest of the way down does not hold water, then one explosion near the top to set the “domino effect” in motion does not hold water either. You need several controlled explosions every few floors to sustain that kind of damage.

When you watched the footage live and repeatedly, did you see visual evidence of explosions every few floors to back up the theory that the government set it up just to scapegoat arabs and then attack them in an illegal war? If you did, post a video link so that I can see it.

I am not UNCONVINCEABLE, but I need more than name-calling.

I don’t take liberals telling me that a progressive income tax is the best form of revenue for the government as the gospel truth. I have seen statistical evidence as well as my own anecdotal evidence that it is not true.

That makes me one of the good guys in your eyes.

I don’t take conservatives telling me that abortion is murder and should therefore be illegal as the gospel truth either.

That also makes me one of the good guys in your eyes.

But when I don’t accept what you tell me as the gospel truth without more convincing, you call me names? Like that is going to help?

You sink to the level of the left and right wingers for that.

Convince me.

I have had all the evidence I need to prove that politicians are stupid beyond the pale. Stupid does not always mean evil. Stupid policies allow evil people to do evil things. Even more stupid policies allow evil people who have been proven to do evil things walk free.

Does that prove that politicians did the things they do with intent, or did they just fuck up and then not have the guts to admit it so that they have to double down on their stupidity?

If a politician does something stupid/evil meaning we do not know what they intended to do, we only saw what happened, then they should be voted out for either stupidity or evilness. Who cares which one it is. The mistake or the intent screwed someone and the politician should pay by being fired.

Call me naive, but I find it real hard to swallow that Bush ordered a building collapsed so that he could go to war. Somebody would have spilled by now.

Is it possible that Chris Kyle was going to spill and was killed for it? Yes, it is possible. Do I believe it?

And yes, the Chechnyan 40 story building burning for a long time, hours or days helps convince me.

But you do realize that for the WTC to be destroyed by operatives ordered by our own government even by the president himself sends shivers down my spine.

Are you telling me that we as a culture are no better than the terrorist arabs?

If you have the signed orders in your possession or some kind of real documentation that the order was given and carried out by our own people, you would not be alive. That kind of evidence -if it is true- will never be found.

Do you think that if BHO found out about it, he would not have blown the whistle on Bush and had the entire republican party keel-hauled?

If I am asking you to convince me, I am not closed minded. And, I am not trying to talk you out of your conclusions.

If you are trying to get me to reach your conclusions and abandon what I THINK and therefore accept a big fucking conspiracy theory, I need more.

I have not conducted any experiments with burning jet fuel, so I do not have my own data on the temperature change vis a vis jet fuel amount, duration of burn, oxygen supply for the burn etc.

I also have not seen a shitload of data from anybody else. I haven’t seen a shitload of simulations either.

Look, my default position is government sucks so a solid majority of the time they are guilty of whatever evil or stupid thing has occured.

Post a link of the material strength, weakening by heat stats.

Post a link of a simulation due to the material weakening or lack thereof.

“But you do realize that for the WTC to be destroyed by operatives ordered by our own government even by the president himself sends shivers down my spine.”

Yes, me also.

But then, I read about Operation Northwoods. Incontestable fact that elements within the US government seriously proposed murdering American civilians to whip up war hysteria against Castro. There is also MK-Ultra – feeding citizens hallucinogenic drugs in order to “program” them. Incontestable fact. The Gulf of Tonkin. It never happened. Johnson made it up – in order to incite war fever among Americans. The USS Liberty… and so on… just a few examples. There are many more. And these are merely the ones we’ve been able to find out about.

The bottom line – for me – is: These people have proved they are capable of anything.

Therefore, my default is suspicion – and skepticism. I don’t accept anything I’m told by the government unless it is backed up by strong supporting evidence that can be checked and confirmed.

The nahhnnlevven story is of a piece with the Warren Report and the “case” presented by Colon Powell at the UN.

Convince me that government is honest, trustworthy, competent, and/or good. Convince me I should believe what they tell me.

It’s not like they prove anything to us. They tell us and we are supposed to believe. Even konspiracy kooks go around trying to disprove the government people.
They can’t disprove government people. It’s like disproving faith.

Government doesn’t prove stuff to us, it tells us. Magic bullet… small fires in just the right places… the whys and how fors are structured with faith in the government being correct. It’s all built around what is told from higher up. The narrative comes first and then people scramble around trying to make evidence fit.

One must first become objective and demand the government prove their position. They never do. Most people simply accept it as the truth that must be dismantled because it comes from authority. The hell with authority, it means nothing to me, facts, logic, deduction, etc… that’s what means something.

Government hasn’t proven its case yet as far as sept-11-2001 is concerned.

The fact is the Lusitania is another excellent example of government perfidy. The ship (and its passengers) was deliberately used as a pawn to get the US into WWI. A civilian passenger liner was loaded with arms and munitions bound for a belligerent power and sailed into a war zone, with the object being to goad the Germans into doing what they had every right to do under the accepted rules of war.

It freefalls symmetrically into its own footprint. That would require all the structural supports to fail at the same time – like cutting the legs out from under a statue. If one leg only gets cut, the statue topples over. To get it to crash straight down requires that both legs be effectively torn out from under the rest of the statue at exactly the same instant.

Cantilevered structures if they lose support fall over. Their structure has to resist the fact that gravity is trying to make them fall over. Remove structure except by severing it in just the right place(s) it will fall over.

But it fell straight down. And it did not fail from the bottom up (or the bottom first) as you’d expect if the substation below just gave way. Watch the video of the collapse. The Penthouse drops – almost immediately followed by a total collapse of the entire thing, with the upper floors free-falling for eight seconds. How is that possible?

See also Meth’s comments about the Twin Towers. Toppling/falling over, partial collapse of some of the floors … ok. But the central steel core just… disintegrating? Free-falling to the earth? It defies belief.

And the Pentagon?

I was there – in the DC area, we still lived there in 2001. A roughly 20 foot diameter hole… initially… no visible damage to either side of the hole. The facade intact. What happened to the wings and tail? And the huge jet engines hanging under the wings? Wouldn’t they have either punched their own holes into the facade – or burrowed tracks into the earth in front of the building (the jet came in at near ground level)? Where are the jet engines? The don;t just vaporize or melt…. my bullshit detector is clanging now….

Check the alleged flight path. It defies belief that such a maneuver could have been executed in a heavy commercial jet by an experienced pilot (I know some) much less a barely competent-to-fly-a-Cessna “terrorist.”

A friend of mine flew F4s in Vietnam – from carriers – and he does not buy it.

Which makes me seriously question it.

Also: The Pentagon/downtown area is heavily surveilled by cameras – government security as well as private security cameras. There were thousands of tourists downtown that day. Why are there no videos of the 757 coming in? Remember: The Towers had been hit much earlier in the morning – so everyone knew something big was happening. It is not credible to me that – with all those people (and cameras, still and video) there is no footage of a 757 coming in. The plane would have made a tremendous amount of noise – and because it would have been flying erratically and because everyone (by this time) would have paid attention to a loud commercial jet flying erratically, there should be plenty of pictures and videos.

It is not like the initial hits on the buildings in NYC – which people were not expecting. But after the planes hit in NY, people in DC (remember, I was there) were frantically looking at the sky for incoming airplanes. They were expecting them.

Yet not one person – apparently – managed to film or snap a picture of an incoming 757?

Yep, I’ve heard that one, too. It actually makes some sense to me. Tall buildings pre-wired for emergency controlled demolition as a safety measure. So as to avoid one falling over in the event of a structural failure, etc.

The public was never told, of course, because of the fear of tall buildings such knowledge would generate. It seemed plausible to me, anyhow. And it’s the one explanation for the events of that day that makes what happened make sense.

They don’t disintegrate and collapse in their own footprint; it’s just not a normal failure mode for steel. It bends, twists, and deforms under stress. It doesn’t pancake.

I might never have questioned the official narrative if they’d leaned over gradually and failed at the strike point.

Anything but near-free-fall-speed collapse into their own basements.

In fact that’s another clincher–conservation of energy.

They had a certain gravitational potential energy standing there. As they fell, if the pancake theory were true, that energy would be partially dissipated as each floor “pancaked”–or was crushed. But it didn’t. It falls within 10% of free-fall–almost no energy wasted on crushing.

But the structure itself HAD to be crushed to get out of the way.

So where did the extra energy come from? What moved the support out of the way, to allow it to fall unencumbered?

THAT was my mental rubicon. Once I’d crossed it, it was all over–the questions came tumbling out. WHY did all three buildings fall neatly into their own basements? What was the molten metal pouring out the sides before collapse? How could pools of molten steel persist for weeks after the collapse? Where did the energy come from to reduce concrete to fine dust?

And then the planes; where were the engines? The landing gear?

Those latter two questions especially applied to the Pentagon. The Rolls-Royce engines on that plane weigh roughly five tons each, made of the most heat-resistant, toughest metals known to man. No fire will destroy them.

Where’d they go? Where were the bodies? The luggage? The seats? Why was the hole round and about 20 feet in diameter–where’d the wings go?

I heard the most absurd explanation for the missing wing-hits on the Pentagon…that they folded back and slipped into the hole as it went in. Even kids watching Wile E. Coyote would call bullshit on that move!

When I watched some of the better films like Loose Change, the slowed-down video footage showing the explosive squibs going off…the windows blowing out in a precise demolition sequence as the towers went down…I became more and more angry.

More angry than I’d ever been in my life; not raging, just a burning, slow anger.

And I determined I’d never be fooled by these psychopaths again, and never trust them again. And move others to do the same.

Clover, as usual, you resort to not answering the question – and spewing non sequiturs.

No one asked why there was not a “perfect silhouette like a kiddie’s cartoon.” That is your confection.

The question was: How is it possible that the impact of the wings did not cause any damage to the building’s facade?

Unlike you, I was there – in DC. I saw the initial local news coverage. Which showed a hole roughly 20 feet in diameter – but on either side of this, the building’s facade (including windows) was undamaged. How can this be, Clover? The Official Story says the 757’s wings folded back as the plane’s fuselage entered the building. But the leading edges would still have struck the facade – and the wings of a 757 are huge. So also are the jet engines hanging underneath each wing. Where are they, Clover? Why no twin furrows in the ground leading up to the building? Why were they not sheared off? And where did they go? They didn’t – couldn’t – melt or vaporize. So, where are they?

And, check out the alleged flight path. You really believe an Abdullah who just barely managed to fly a single engine Cessna could drop a heavy multi-engine commercial jet onto the deck – feet above the ground – and fly that thing at 300-plus knots into the side of a building? Really?

I have read in more than one place and firstly in A+E 911’s site that nanite thermate particles were found in the air and on some close by things much later on after people could get closer. Why all the security with the steel? One “official” was “caught” with a memento rivet on his desk. He was canned and sent to jail but I can’t recall his name or title. No doubt he thought little about that rivet as being part of what was verboten to keep, i.e., steel from the twin towers but they meant ANY steel. So why all the secrecy about the steel? All anyone needed to prove explosives were used was a single sample. I’d bet some worker has a piece or two hidden and can’t figure out how to get it to somebody without being caught. That steel recovered from those towers moved to China almost as rapidly as it moved from a great height to the ground.
The twin towers had workers in it for several months supposedly removing asbestos but nobody ever remembers any asbestos being carted away. Pictures that were taken by unknowns(damn, I wouldn’t be saying I’d taken them either)during this supposed asbestos removal show newly sprayed “paint” on the support beams and other steel parts(joists, etc.) It was later confirmed that a new Israeli technique and invention(nanotech thermate) of spraying nanite thermate and creating a huge fire could and would destroy practically anything it was applied to. This would certainly make one understand why the buildings fell as they did.

Surely “they” have to have realized that their ploy would be uncovered, dissected, proven transparently fraudulent, and ridiculed for all the world to behold within a matter of days (if not hours) of the false flag operation they tried to pull off.

That the agents of TPTB chose such a transparently imbecilic technological ruse (pressure cookers? SERIOUSLY?), one that even techno-ignorant troglodytes would have laughed at, tells us that, quite frankly, they don’t care whether or not they insult our intelligence and make fools of themselves. These are creatures who have taken their masks off and are going to assert raw power, at the point of a gun (see the declarations of Boston’s head swine for what’s in store for the foreseeable future) regardless of whether or not we loudly call bullshit on them and their buffoonish power grabs.

Lock and load, folks. They’re about to fire the opening salvo of war soon.

Depends on the particulars of the design. I am not particularly familiar with pressure cookers but I would think it should be designed with a relief valve that if not functioning would then go to the next step of breaking a latch with a safety to prevent the lid from going flying but allow the pressure out. However, safeties and designs can be changed by those looking to use something for another purpose. Someone with half a brain could make it fail the way they want it to.

“Pressure vessels do not fail via many holes, they fail by fracture. tearing of the walls. ” Yes, you’re right. The one thing that I take away from the very early declaration that this was an IED made from a pressure cooker is the fact that this type of IED has been used in Iraq.

Naturally, the unimaginative retards who come up with these myths they promote went with something suggested by a military source. Just as naturally, the retards can’t really explain the way such an IED would work.

My usual rule of thumb is: if it’s on TV, it’s a lie, and usually a transparent one, at that.

“Yet we are told that the Marathon bombs were placed inside pressure cookers and packed with nails and ball bearings. If that were true, the explosions would have created many, many small holes as the inserted shrapnel flew through the cooker and out in every direction.”

Err, no. It is always interesting when individuals with little or no scientific background make such statements.

The simple answer is that until the containment vessel (pressure cooker) breached, the contents had zero (0) velocity. The contents didn’t move until the container breached – that is why there are no holes in it. 100 level physics . . .

Also, the guys in the black jackets and khaki pants are more interesting to me. And how the MSM (and the F.B.I.) ignores them, but this isn’t a khaki pants control thread, so I thought I’d stick to the topic. However; now that I’ve strayed, what’s your take on those guys? Who are they, and who paid them?

I’m seriously starting to question the “most people” part of this. If MOST PEOPLE were incapable of ANY rational thought on the matter, I suspect that the blood would be running bridle deep in the streets. And it may yet, at least for a while. But reality will eventually take over. “Mad Max” can’t go on forever, simply because – eventually – they run out of blood.

All people, everyone, everywhere actually do everything with their own interests in mind. A lot of them don’t have a clear idea what is actually in their own best interest, of course, but they think they do. So, when things turn out to harm them directly, even the most recalcitrant believer – in whatever drives them, will begin to (at least internally) question their ideas and choices and, probably, at least explore some new ones.

I suspect that all the people who bought guns (just for one example) in the last four or five years USED to be in that unthinking, uncritical demographic… but are no more.

“So, when things turn out to harm them directly, even the most recalcitrant believer – in whatever drives them, will begin to (at least internally) question their ideas and choices and, probably, at least explore some new ones.”

I would offer that even when it does harm them directly they never really explore the larger questions. Most people I have spent years debating politics with (Reps and Dems alike) don’t see that for one to be enlightened you must accept a unified political theory that does not contradict itself when explored.

They see no issue with punishing murder but starting wars… throwing a thief in jail but demanding taxation… They only see so far as it effects them and hardly ever explore the bigger questions.

So while one might see the recent gun purchases as a sign of more waking I only see it as a sign of obedient people trying to beat an edict from government and then being grandfathered in; never once questioning how we have gotten to this point.

POPULAR CATEGORY

Eric started out writing about cars for mainstream media outlets such as The Washington Times, Detroit News and Free Press, Investors Business Daily, The American Spectator, National Review, The Chicago Tribune and Wall Street Journal.